The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1887-11-03
Prohibition in Court.

Prohibition in Court.
SEVEN CASES PENDING BEFORE THE UNITED
STATES SUPREME BENCH. TEMPERANCE
LAWS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS UNDER THE
CONSTITUTIONS.
There is 4 great deal Of excitement among
temperance people throughout the country
owing to an apprehension that the Supreme
Court of the United States will declare the
proh,itory liquor laws unconstitutional says
special Washington despatch to the New
York sun. Seven cases arc pending before
| the court. Tive Of them come from Kansas,
four from Iowa. and one from Atlanta Ga.
The Kansas cases have already been argued In
! behalf of the brewers bv Senator Vest of
Missouri, and Joseph II. Choate of New York.
To the astoni>hment and Indignation of the
ProhibitiOnsts no one appeared on their side
of the question, and they are now in Il great
state of excitement for fear the court will de-
eide, as it naturally will do. upon the case as
presented eX partc. The blame rests with
Attorney General Bradford Of Kansas, who
had charge of the cases and failed for some
| reason to put in an appearance.
The first case tried before the State Supreme
Court of Kansas was decided against the saloon
keepers, although Judge Brewer then merl-
DCI VI tic court, gave IL uiSSCUIli5 OPINION, IN
which he held that under the Fourteenth
Amendment the property Or business of a
citizen could not be destroyed without COM
pensation, and he was of the opinion that the
state would have to pay damages for all saloons
closed. Soon after rendering this decision,
Judge Brewer was elevated to the United
States Circuit bench, and the case being appeal
ed to him, was decided In favor of the liquor
interest on the same grounds that he held while
a member of the lower court.
"'Ihis was known as the Mengler case. The
brewers then made up another test case, even
stronger than the original one, to which n
Leavenwcrth brewer named Ziebold was made
Il party. and that being carried up to Judge
Brewer was decided in the same way. Both
the Mengler and Zebold eases were appealed
to the United States Supreme Court, and the
saloon interest was represented at the hcarin.
few days ago by Senator Vest, and Joseph IL.
Choate. the Attorney General of Kansas, fail
Ing. as has been said, to appear.
Being stirred up by the Prohbitionists,
Judge Bradford telegraphed to Britain and
Gray, attorneys of Washington, who appeared
in court and asked for Il rchcaring of the Kan
eases in order that Bradford might put in
an argument. Commenting upon the motion,
the Court said that Bradford would be per-
mitte'i to file altilavits showing why he had not
appeared when the case was called. and if the
at1ilavits showed that he had not been guilty Of
negligence the Court would consider the matter.
''' ''''N ''''
the Prohibitunsts showed some reason why
the laws should ret he declared unconstitl-
,'oiin'' y ""h'" '' 'o iPeieu 70 "ceioc III laNof
4i the points pfesel tcd by vest ahd Choatc.
'f"hiuf" mas tFie@faI ieu tiiat ne IS on MS way
from Kansas ard will be in court Monday next.
Especial Dispatch to The Boston .JourIal.l
WAsliIS,;voN. Oct. ot The JTn;tcd S4,tas
Suprenr Court to.]ov re fused TO t,r,nt tho mo
ton of the attornevs f(r 1hn PrnbLition {
that ,hr eases with wnrn or,liv nr.r,,eI Nv
Senator Ve.t onI H. Th,a.o r.,..o,,.ti, sLa,Ia
h, unnunI and has ..sicncJ no rca.on' f,Ir t,n
refusal. Menuwhi,r Mr.. H,.3IforI. thr Attor-
ney General tor the Sfain of Kansas cases
from which state are invoIval in thn r,,lin1
has arrived and has made I'M i1,jrnenI,nt mo,
tiou In the | -nitoI states S,,nrnmo Cnurt fron,
which II o,nnors thnt tba f.rt thot tho prnI,;
I,iti,,,ists v,rn .,nt rerresented t tho racnn,
anal ar~u,nant was thr r,Suit of y n,isannrn.
i,on-;on aD for t,,,t r..,So,, ha ,,.I-a nv, ni: u
tiooal ftot;or tha, tbo raSts lao rannaneI
Mt !,n,;t,.,I Lns ONO +.ch,,i.aI ,,a;,>t j.; s,,,-
mort Of lis motion ,Ttc onnornnts If tho
nTohilitor, laws stand m tlie .erord ,s not
hayinr ,Irictiy comnJ;cI With tbr ,uies Of the
Slnreme Court 'TI,n iu,es ran,,ira That brinfS
SHALL ba filed three doys hnforr nm oral arru.
meut. The official ;ilino marks on Heir hrief
in 1h;s instance show thot tj,ev ,ycra t;laa nnv
l,i?r tiav I,.f,,Te ill.,. arg;,nrnt i,nt !. ~;
nTl,1i:~i, H., .,,T,itaI tirt thr roint ro,,as tnn
lat. -. in, eomTt ,c-, brarj t,,e or,1n,n,,t a,I
!,'@' - TN, 'o't nv h:t. iic arSuine:it ail
the representatives. ol ihe lfohlbitiol'Sts were
hoi pfGseht to make objection. i he iact seems
70 ne 'ht: !loSe "Eo have managed the case for
ihe ifoi'oltlomlSis have been tn" victims OF
i,ii>"h',etsi'uldilg because theS uiu not infCrEl
themselves accurately as TO the method OF pro-
ce''lre ana the rules IN the Omted states s'l-
nfeiHe court; IL appear" from the attorneys
that the ifohiDliioi!stS claim not to have UNI
uefstoo'' 'nn mailer anu We're III short caught
mapping. !he ciioIt Is now TO be made to en-
deaVor 10 iG"''cc Inc United states supreme
1o'ift 10 reheNe tha representatives CT the
Ifoh!hitohists "t Tie elect of this error in
pfartcc aiio ~ l4rhit an ora! argument on the
proh!".lioh silc III support OF the constitution
amy OF the law 10 re hltte. III the ordinary
court, !lc hited states supreme Court Will
sio, "ecide tnls new fh)t1oh ,lhtll next Monday.
ne ifohibltlohist7 are the more anxious to
nave an ar@uihei, IL tllis matter as they are
ai'tfcHen-i'e OF tiie maj result, liaSmuch as
Ill one oi 'he prcilmlnary orders that haS been
IiaHe lil', announcement oiIicay was that the
decision below was alilrmet by divided court
mere. ne decision of the court below WAS
sli - or N iseo,s M ' lorgs sn .eh th,t tF1 ON
pu"ui p'I ~ lesui;'c tlie sue ol liquors III lhe
State. This was thc derisiou vhiIh was rem er.
dered by United States District Judge Brewer,
Mho; o., however IN NE case OF the brewery or
nis'''i'Fy' mas oecinea 'he IOWA Prohlbltion
Ia" Is uh'oh>tllutioha', unless the state, be-
loie ueslroyihS 'hc cstablisilhehl' should com
pehSale It's owner ior It's cost or be responsible
III 4lnl'sen lor Us destruction. me decision